Hi Marc/Robert,
On 03/16/2017 08:41 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 16/03/17 13:31, Robert Richter wrote:
>> On 15.03.17 18:46:22, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> On 15/03/17 18:37, Robert Richter wrote:
On 14.03.17 12:40:45, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
>> @@ -1698,6 +1706,9 @@ static int __init
Hi Marc/Robert,
On 03/16/2017 08:41 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 16/03/17 13:31, Robert Richter wrote:
>> On 15.03.17 18:46:22, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> On 15/03/17 18:37, Robert Richter wrote:
On 14.03.17 12:40:45, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
>> @@ -1698,6 +1706,9 @@ static int __init
On 15.03.17 18:46:22, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 15/03/17 18:37, Robert Richter wrote:
> > On 14.03.17 12:40:45, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
> >>> @@ -1698,6 +1706,9 @@ static int __init its_init_one(struct its_node *its)
> >>> return err;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> + /* Setup dma_ops for
On 15.03.17 18:46:22, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 15/03/17 18:37, Robert Richter wrote:
> > On 14.03.17 12:40:45, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
> >>> @@ -1698,6 +1706,9 @@ static int __init its_init_one(struct its_node *its)
> >>> return err;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> + /* Setup dma_ops for
On 16/03/17 13:31, Robert Richter wrote:
> On 15.03.17 18:46:22, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 15/03/17 18:37, Robert Richter wrote:
>>> On 14.03.17 12:40:45, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
>
> @@ -1698,6 +1706,9 @@ static int __init its_init_one(struct its_node *its)
> return err;
>
On 16/03/17 13:31, Robert Richter wrote:
> On 15.03.17 18:46:22, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 15/03/17 18:37, Robert Richter wrote:
>>> On 14.03.17 12:40:45, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
>
> @@ -1698,6 +1706,9 @@ static int __init its_init_one(struct its_node *its)
> return err;
>
On 14.03.17 12:40:45, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
> I don't see anywhere in this patch, code calls explicitly CMA API to
> allocate memory for device table. The CMA feature is an optional in
> kernel, and will be handled transparently inside the the DMA
> layer. It would be nicer to not mention
On 14.03.17 12:40:45, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
> I don't see anywhere in this patch, code calls explicitly CMA API to
> allocate memory for device table. The CMA feature is an optional in
> kernel, and will be handled transparently inside the the DMA
> layer. It would be nicer to not mention
On 15/03/17 18:37, Robert Richter wrote:
> On 14.03.17 12:40:45, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
>
>> I don't see anywhere in this patch, code calls explicitly CMA API to
>> allocate memory for device table. The CMA feature is an optional in
>> kernel, and will be handled transparently inside the the
On 15/03/17 18:37, Robert Richter wrote:
> On 14.03.17 12:40:45, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
>
>> I don't see anywhere in this patch, code calls explicitly CMA API to
>> allocate memory for device table. The CMA feature is an optional in
>> kernel, and will be handled transparently inside the the
Hi Robert,
I don't see anywhere in this patch, code calls explicitly CMA API to allocate
memory for device table. The CMA feature is an optional in kernel, and will be
handled transparently inside the the DMA layer. It would be nicer to not
mention CMA word in the commit subject.
On
Hi Robert,
I don't see anywhere in this patch, code calls explicitly CMA API to allocate
memory for device table. The CMA feature is an optional in kernel, and will be
handled transparently inside the the DMA layer. It would be nicer to not
mention CMA word in the commit subject.
On
12 matches
Mail list logo